Longstreet or Jackson

[ben_ross]

I would not say the "Seven Day's" I would say Glendale. Lee's Orders for Beaver Dam Creek were unclear, and when all the officers met, Lee gave Jackson oral instructions, then when he issued written orders they were somewhat different than what he had told Jackson before. Therefore, once Jackson got into place, he was confused... Then at Savages Station, a poorly written order that was issued by Chilton (it was meant as an alternate plan) had Jackson staying put near the river to guard against a yankee move up towards Yorktown. Therefore, he did not aid Magruder because he "had other important duties."

O, I forgot Gaines's Mill. He was there and his troops made breakthroughs all along the line.

Malvern HIll he followed orders.

As for Manassas, There is no record that he recieved Lee's orders. Further, his lines were shot up and unbelievably tangled. For him to advance with any shape to his line, he would need time to sort things out. Longstreets line advanced very quickly. The real key to the battle of 2nd Manassas was why were the federals not Flanked out of there line infront of Henry House hill? The troops were there, but no one moved...

[gary]

One thing I forgot to mention about the Seven Days...

Maps. The Confederates had over a year to prepare maps and Lee being an engineer should have had it done. It was their own countryside that they were going to fight on so they should have had maps. Lee never provided Jackson with adequate maps so Jackson did go astray at critical times. Not Ole Jack's fault for that but rather Lee.

[ben_ross]

Not to mention that I think Jackson was lacking his good old map maker, Mr. Hotchkiss.

[sgtcsa]

You are very perseptive, sir.
You know our hero's very well. Although he may have been a saint to some, I just consider him one hell of a General.

regards,
sgtcsa

[8thvacav]

I think Jackson was way above Longstreet. Longstreet let his hugh ego get in his way.At the 7 day battle he took the wrong route causing the troops that were waiting on that road to be late getting up. Lee would give Jackson a order and knew it would be done. It wasn't the same with Longstreet. He knew a better way. You say Lee's orders weren't clear to longstreet. Hill understood them and got tired of waiting on Longstreet. I'm sorry but I don't think there is a comparison between the tow.

[max]

I like Longstreet, but would still go with Jackson. After his death the AONV was never the same finely oiled machine.

Max

[elektratig]

I must say, the more I read about Longstreet, the less I like him. There seems to have been a somewhat dishonest or dishonorable strain to his character. He accepted his commission with the Confederacy before resigning from the Federal army. Whatever you think of his conduct during Seven Pines, his post-battle statements blaming General Huger were grotesque lies. Whatever you think of his conduct during the Knoxville campaign, his treatment of and bringing charges against Lafayette McLaws were disgusting, and he almost certainly knew that the charges were baseless, since he then did everything he could to delay the hearings.

Am I overstating things, or was there a distasteful undercurrent to the man?

I understand that his "character" is a separate issue from a strictly military analysis of his competence on the battlefield, but it makes me uneasy.

[FSPowers]

I feel that both generals complimented each other. Jackson was firey with his tactics. Longstreet was cautious. It could be that Jackson was among the last of pure open field tacticans (large manuever formations, frontal assaults). Longstreet can be called the first ot the 20th Century style generals (trenches, fortifications, interlocking fields of fire, combined arms operations). The battle of Gettysburg could have ended differently if; a. Jackson was not wounded at Chancellorsville (with his death by pneumonia, or b. Longstreet's sugesstion to move to the SE of Gettysburg had been accepted by Lee.

[ole]

Gentlemen:

My opinion can't be as studied as yours, but I think both Jackson and Longstreet were overrated as individual combat commanders. Without Lee, neither would have gained the idolatry they receive today. Although Jackson exhibited individual brilliance early on, and one might expect him to have continued to exhibit that brilliance, it was Lee that guided it. During the 7 days, his lackadaisical performance gave ample evidence of his weaknesses. (I'm giving Lee the benefit of the doubt here, as he had not yet taken the measure of Jackson, nor Jackson of him.)

I'm of like mind with elektratig -- Lee's "War Horse" had some suspiciously reprehensible characteristics. Nothing concrete, but he wouldn't ever rise to the level of esteem held for R. E. Lee -- at least not in my mind. However, Lee trusted him highly, so I could be wrong.

By the way, Mr. Powers, an excellent and much appreciated observation. Thank you.
Ole

[russ_aukerman]

F.S. -

You're point is well taken. I post only to challenge the statement that Longstreet was cautious. I see him more as strictly trusting to his preparation. Longstreet's assaults, described as hammer blows and the like, were so strong precisely because of that preparation. The term 'cautious' has negative connotations which I personally don't attribute to Longstreet.